http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasDerivedFrom	http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/format	name_CH1_1980	name_MSW1_1982	name_CH3_1991	name_MSW2_1993	name_Koopman_1994	name_MSW3_2005	name_HMW_2019	name_BatNames_2022	name_MDD_2022	name_IUCN_2022	name_BatNames_2023	name_MDD_2023	name_MDD_2025_2.0	name_batnames_2025_1.7	name_MDD_2025_2.2	column151	taxonomic_notes_concatenated	column171	synonyms_CH1	subspecies__MSW2	synonyms__MSW1	synonyms_CH3	synonyms_MSW2	subspecies_Koopman94_interpreted	subspecies_MSW3_interpreted	synonym_MSW3_interpreted	subspecies_HMW_interpreted	synonym_HMW_interpreted	subspecies_batnames_interpreted	synonym_batnames_interpreted	synonym_MDD_interpreted	synonym_IUCN_interpreted	subspecies_batnames2023_interpreted	synonym_batnames2023_interpreted	synonym_MDD2023_interpreted	synonym_MDD2025_interpreted	subspecies_batnames2025_interpreted	synonyms_batnames2025_interpreted	nominalNames	column391	docOrigin_CH1	commonName_CH1	distribution_CH1	docOrigin_MSW1	column451	typeLocality_MSW1	authority_MSW1	year_MSW1	citation_MSW1	distribution	comment_MSW1	docOrigin_CH3	commonName_CH3	distribution_CH3	docOrigin_MSW2	authority_MSW2	year_MSW2	citation_MSW2	comments_MSW2	distribution_MSW2	typeLocality_MSW2	docOrigin_Koopman94	authority_Koopman94	year_Koopman94	description_Koopman94	distribution_Koopman94	diversity_Koopman94	subspecies_Koopman94	page	rank	name	authority	year	parent	parent_rank	corrected_name	actual_species_count	claimed_species_count	dental_formula	description	diversity	full_subspecies_text	name_line	species_index	subspecies	synonym	text	docOrigin_MSW3	order_MSW3	family_MSW3	subfamily_MSW3	tribe_MSW3	name_MSW3	genus_MSW3	subgenus_MSW3	species_MSW3	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MSW3	(parentheses (1=author & date in parentheses)_MSW3	authoritySpeciesYear_MSW3	actualDate_MSW3	citation_MSW3	volume_MSW3	issue_MSW3	pages_MSW3	type_species_MSW3	commonName_MSW3	typeLocality_MSW3	distribution_MSW3	status_MSW3	synonym_MSW3	comments_MSW3	docId_HMW	docOrigin_HMW	docISBN_HMW	docName_HMW	docMasterId_HMW	docPageNumber_HMW	derivedFrom_HMW	name_HMW	family_HMW	genus_HMW	species_HMW	authoritySpeciesAuthor_HMW	authoritySpeciesYear	commonNames_HMW	taxonomy_HMW	subspeciesAndDistribution_HMW	descriptiveNotes_HMW	habitat_HMW	foodAndFeeding_HMW	breeding_HMW	activityPatterns_HMW	movementsHomeRangeAndSocialOrganization_HMW	statusAndConservation_HMW	bibliography_HMW	distributionImageURL_HMW	verbatimText_HMW	docOrigin_batnames	family_batnames	name_batnames	genus_batnames	subgenus_batnames	species_batnames	authoritySpeciesAuthor_batnames	date_batnames	parentheses_batnames (1=author & date in parentheses)	citation_batnames	docPageNumber_batnames	common Name_batnames	synonyms_batnames	type_locality_batnames	Distribution_batnames	CITES_batnames	IUCN_batnames	comments_batnames	docOrigin_MDD	name_MDD	phylosort_MDD	mainCommonName_MDD	otherCommonNames_MDD	subclass_MDD	infraclass_MDD	magnorder_MDD	superorder_MDD	order_MDD	suborder_MDD	infraorder_MDD	parvorder_MDD	superfamily_MDD	family_MDD	subfamily_MDD	tribe_MDD	genus_MDD	subgenus_MDD	specificEpithet_MDD	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MDD	authoritySpeciesYear_MDD	authorityParentheses_MDD	originalNameCombination_MDD	authoritySpeciesCitation_MDD	authoritySpeciesLink_MDD	holotypeVoucher_MDD	holotypeVoucherURIs_MDD	typeLocality_MDD	typeLocalityLatitude_MDD	typeLocalityLongitude_MDD	nominalNames_MDD	taxonomyNotes_MDD	taxonomyNotesCitation_MDD	countryDistribution_MDD	continentDistribution_MDD	biogeographicRealm_MDD	iucnStatus_MDD	extinct_MDD	domestic_MDD	flagged_MDD	CMW_sciName_MDD	diffSinceCMW_MDD	MSW3_matchtype_MDD	MSW3_sciName_MDD	diffSinceMSW3_MDD	docOrigin_IUCN	internalTaxonId_IUCN	NAME_IUCN	kingdomName_IUCN	phylumName_IUCN	className_IUCN	orderName_IUCN	familyName_IUCN	genusName_IUCN	speciesName_IUCN	authoritySpeciesAuthorYear_IUCN	taxonomicNotes_IUCN	assessmentId_IUCN	scientificName_IUCN	redlistCategory_IUCN	redlistCriteria_IUCN	yearPublished_IUCN	assessmentDate_IUCN	criteriaVersion_IUCN	language_IUCN	rationale_IUCN	habitat_IUCN	threats_IUCN	population_IUCN	populationTrend_IUCN	range_IUCN	useTrade_IUCN	systems_IUCN	conservationActions_IUCN	realm_IUCN	yearLastSeen_IUCN	possiblyExtinct_IUCN	possiblyExtinctInTheWild_IUCN	scopes_IUCN	docOrigin_batnames2023	FAMILY_batnames2023	GENUS_batnames2023	SUBGENUS_batnames2023	SPECIES_batnames2023	authoritySpeciesAuthor_batnames2023	authoritySpeciesYearbatnames2023	PARENTHESES_batnames2023 (1=AUTHOR & DATE IN PARENTHESES)	CITATION_batnames2023	PAGES_batnames2023	COMMON NAME_batnames2023	SYNONYMS_batnames2023	TYPE LOCALITY_batnames2023	DISTRIBUTION_batnames2023	CITES_batnames2023	IUCN_batnames2023	COMMENTS_batnames2023	name MDD2023	id_MDD2023	phylosort_MDD2023	mainCommonName_MDD2023	otherCommonNames_MDD2023	subclass_MDD2023	infraclass_MDD2023	magnorder_MDD2023	superorder_MDD2023	order_MDD2023	suborder_MDD2023	infraorder_MDD2023	parvorder_MDD2023	superfamily_MDD2023	Family_mdd2023	subfamily_MDD2023	tribe_MDD2023	genus_MDD2023	subgenus_MDD2023	specificEpithet_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesYear_MDD2023	authorityParentheses_MDD2023	originalNameCombination_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesCitation_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesLink_MDD2023	holotypeVoucher_MDD2023	holotypeVoucherURIs_MDD2023	typeLocality_MDD2023	typeLocalityLatitude_MDD2023	typeLocalityLongitude_MDD2023	nominalNames_MDD2023	taxonomyNotes_MDD2023	taxonomyNotesCitation_MDD2023	distributionNotes_MDD2023	distributionNotesCitation_MDD2023	subregionDistribution_MDD2023	countryDistribution_MDD2023	continentDistribution_MDD2023	biogeographicRealm_MDD2023	iucnStatus_MDD2023	extinct_MDD2023	domestic_MDD2023	flagged_MDD2023	CMW_sciName_MDD2023	diffSinceCMW_MDD2023	MSW3_matchtype_MDD2023	MSW3_sciName_MDD2023	diffSinceMSW3_MDD2023	docOrigin_MDD2025	sciName	id	phylosort	mainCommonName	otherCommonNames	subclass	infraclass	magnorder	superorder	order	suborder	infraorder	parvorder	superfamily	family	subfamily	tribe	genus	subgenus	specificEpithet	authoritySpeciesAuthor	authorityParentheses	originalNameCombination	authoritySpeciesCitation	authoritySpeciesLink	typeVoucher	typeKind	typeVoucherURIs	typeLocality	typeLocalityLatitude	typeLocalityLongitude	taxonomyNotes	taxonomyNotesCitation	distributionNotes	distributionNotesCitation	subregionDistribution	countryDistribution	continentDistribution	biogeographicRealm	iucnStatus	extinct	domestic	flagged	CMW_sciName	diffSinceCMW	MSW3_matchtype	MSW3_sciName	diffSinceMSW3	docOrigin_batnames2025	Family	Genus	Subgenus	Species	Author	Date	Parentheses (1=author & date in parentheses)	Citation	Pages	Common Name	Synonyms	Type Locality	Distribution	CITES	IUCN	Comments	column3781	column3791	subtribe	CONCAT_ALTNAMES
line:xlsx:hash://sha256/181a039844a33e66a35a457b7ece741051086608e425a040051b79581d606b97!/Sheet1!/L1397	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus luctus		[MSW2] Includes lanosus; see Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951:121).; [MSW3] trifoliatus species group. Includes lanosus; see Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003).; [HMW] Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1834 , Tapos , Java , Indonesia . Rhinolophus luctus is included in the trifoliatus species group. Taxonomic status of true R. luctus is currently uncertain. Based primarily on karyological and limited morphological data, three taxa previously included under R. luctus are now recognized as separate species: R.perniger , R. mono , and the recently described R. luctoides , all considered closely related species of the species complex. The exact distributional limits between these species are uncertain. Tentatively , R. luctus in a strict sense is restricted to the Sunda Islands, R. morio consists of lowland populations on the Malay Peninsula, R. luctoides consists of montane populations on the Malay Peninsula and possibly perhaps further north into the rest of South-east Asia, and R.perniger consists of the rest of the former distribution of this species from northern India to continental South-east Asia. Genetic data thus far has not been implemented across the distribution full of this species complex. However, specimens from China and Myanmar clustered with those of R. luctoides , whereas R. morio appeared as sister to this clade based on limited genetic data. A later study by M. Volleth and colleagues in 2017 involving further karyotypic data showed that specimens from China that morphologically resembled specimens from India had a distinct karyotype from R. luctoides and were recognized as a distinct species named herewith R.perniger . On the other hand, a specimen from Vietnam had a karyotype nearly identical to that of R luctoides and this specimen was dubbed R. cf. luctoides . The Vietnamese populations are tentatively included under R. pemiger here, but they may in fact be best included with R. luctoides with further study. Volleth and colleagues in 2015 discussed the possibility that there are multiple cryptic species within the R. luctus species complex living sympatrically throughout the distribution of the complex since there are a number of records through its distribution that do not match the typical description of R. luctus . This may be the case, but a very substantial review of the current material is needed before any more conclusions can be made. Relationships between various taxa within this clade need to be resolved more adequately and substantially using genetic, karyological, and morphological data. Two subspecies currently recognized.; [batnames2022]  trifoliatus species group. Does not include lanosus ; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus ; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). Includes perniger pending additional study (see Volleth et al., 2017, 2021; Burgin, 2019; our account for lanosus ). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).; [MDD2022] previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus; [IUCN] This species belongs to trifoliatus species group. Simmons (2005) inclusion of Sri Lanka in distribution is possibly based on taxon sobrinus Andersen, 1918, which is presently under Rhinolophus beddomei Andersen, 1905 (Srinivasulu pers. comm.).; [batnames2023]  trifoliatus species group. Does not include lanosus ; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus ; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). Includes perniger pending additional study (see Volleth et al., 2017, 2021; Burgin, 2019; our account for lanosus ). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).; [MDD2023] previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus; [MDD2025_2.0] previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus; [batnames2025_1.7] trifoliatus species group. Does not include perniger or lanosus; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021) and Burgin (2019), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).; [MDD2025_2.2] previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus				lanosus		beddomei, foetidus, formosae, lanosus, morio, perniger, sobrinus, spurcus.	sobrinus, beddomei, perniger, formosae, spurcus, morio, luctus, foetidus, lanosus	luctus, foetidus, lanosus, morio, perniger, spurcus	geminus	luctus, foetidus		luctus, foetidus, perniger, spurcus	luctus - geminus	luctus, geminus	This species belongs to trifoliatus species group. Simmons (2005) inclusion of Sri Lanka in distribution is possibly based on taxon sobrinus Andersen, 1918, which is presently under Rhinolophus beddomei Andersen, 1905 (Srinivasulu pers. comm.).	luctus	luctus - geminus	luctus, geminus 	luctus, geminus 	luctus 	luctus - geminus	luctus Temminck, 1834|geminus Andersen, 1905		Corbet, G.B. and Hill, J.E. 1980. A World List of Mammalian Species. British Museum (Natural History), London, 226 pp.	Woolly horseshoe bat	N India – S China – Java, Borneo	Honacki, J.H., Kinman, K.E. and Koeppl, J.W. 1982. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Allen Press, Lawrence, 694 pp.	Rhinolophus luctus	Indonesia, Java.	Temminck	1835	Monogr. Mamm., 2:24.	Distribution: Ranging from north ern India east to Taiwan and south to Ceylon and Malaya, Sumatra to Bali and Borneo.		Corbet, G.B. and Hill, J.E. 1991. A World List of Mammalian Species. Third edition. Oxford University Press, London, 243 pp. ISBN 0-19-854017-5	Woolly horseshoe bat	India, Sri Lanka – S China – Java, Bali, Borneo	Koopman, K.F. 1993. Order Chiroptera. Pp. 137–242 in Wilson, D.E. and Reeder, D.M. (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1206 pp.	Temminck	1835	Monogr. Mamm., 2:24.	Includes lanosus; see Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951:121).	India (including Sikkim), Nepal, Burma, Sri Lanka, S China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Malay Peninsula, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali.	Indonesia, Java.		TEMMINCK	1835	Zygomatic width greater than mastoid width. Up per incisors relatively large and approximated. Sella moderately high and broad with expanded lappets at its base; internarial lobes at base of sella forming a broad, rather flat, saucer. Pelage woolly. Size relatively large (forearm length, 57-78 mm).	Distribution: Ranging from north ern India east to Taiwan and south to Ceylon and Malaya, Sumatra to Bali and Borneo.	Nine sub species are currently recognized:	R. I. sobrinus (Ceylon), R. I. beddomei (southern India), R. l. perniger (northern India, Burma, perhaps northern Thai land), R. I. lanosus (southeastern China), R. I. formosae (Taiwan), R. I. spurcus (Hainan), R. I. morio (Malay pen insula, northern Sumatra), R. I. luctus (southern Sumatra, Java, Bali), R. I. foetidus (Borneo).	58	species	R. luctus	TEMMINCK	1835	Rhinolophus	genus	Rhinolophus luctus				Zygomatic width greater than mastoid width. Up per incisors relatively large and approximated. Sella moderately high and broad with expanded lappets at its base; internarial lobes at base of sella forming a broad, rather flat, saucer. Pelage woolly. Size relatively large (forearm length, 57-78 mm).	Nine sub species are currently recognized:		55. R. luctus TEMMINCK 1835 [luctus group].	55	NA			Don E. Wilson & DeeAnn M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed), Johns Hopkins University Press, 2,142 pp. (Available from Johns Hopkins University Press, 1-800-537-5487 or (410) 516-6900, or at http://www.press.jhu.edu).	CHIROPTERA	Rhinolophidae			Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus		luctus	Temminck		1834		Tijdschrift Natuurl. Gesch. Physiol.	1		23		Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Indonesia, Java, Tapos.	India, Nepal, Burma, Sri Lanka, S China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Peninsular Malaysia; Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali (Indonesia).	IUCN 2003 and IUCN/SSC Action Plan (2001) – Lower Risk (lc).	geminus K. Andersen, 1905; foetidus K. Andersen, 1918; lanosus K. Andersen, 1905; morio Gray, 1842; perniger Hodgson, 1843; spurcus Allen, 1928.	trifoliatus species group. Includes lanosus; see Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003).	885887A2FFC58A23F89EFB79F66CD74C	Handbook of the Mammals of the World – Volume 9 Bats, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions	978-84-16728-19-0	hbmw_9_Rhinolophidae.pdf.imf	hash://md5/7461ffdaffcf8a29ffccffa1ff85d963	330	zip:hash://sha256/ec5fd314a06aba1a7b0b72f23e54ac625ae272bd98f82f1d01f4c09627d9e8e0!/treatments-xml-main/data/88/58/87/885887A2FFFC8A1AFF01FC38F526DBEB.xml	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophidae	Rhinolophus	luctus	Temminck	1834	Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat @en | Rhinolophe deuil @fr | Grosse Wollhaar-Hufeisennase @de | Herradura lanosogrande @es | Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat @en | Woolly Horseshoe Bat @en	Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1834 , Tapos , Java , Indonesia . Rhinolophus luctus is included in the trifoliatus species group. Taxonomic status of true R. luctus is currently uncertain. Based primarily on karyological and limited morphological data, three taxa previously included under R. luctus are now recognized as separate species: R.perniger , R. mono , and the recently described R. luctoides , all considered closely related species of the species complex. The exact distributional limits between these species are uncertain. Tentatively , R. luctus in a strict sense is restricted to the Sunda Islands, R. morio consists of lowland populations on the Malay Peninsula, R. luctoides consists of montane populations on the Malay Peninsula and possibly perhaps further north into the rest of South-east Asia, and R.perniger consists of the rest of the former distribution of this species from northern India to continental South-east Asia. Genetic data thus far has not been implemented across the distribution full of this species complex. However, specimens from China and Myanmar clustered with those of R. luctoides , whereas R. morio appeared as sister to this clade based on limited genetic data. A later study by M. Volleth and colleagues in 2017 involving further karyotypic data showed that specimens from China that morphologically resembled specimens from India had a distinct karyotype from R. luctoides and were recognized as a distinct species named herewith R.perniger . On the other hand, a specimen from Vietnam had a karyotype nearly identical to that of R luctoides and this specimen was dubbed R. cf. luctoides . The Vietnamese populations are tentatively included under R. pemiger here, but they may in fact be best included with R. luctoides with further study. Volleth and colleagues in 2015 discussed the possibility that there are multiple cryptic species within the R. luctus species complex living sympatrically throughout the distribution of the complex since there are a number of records through its distribution that do not match the typical description of R. luctus . This may be the case, but a very substantial review of the current material is needed before any more conclusions can be made. Relationships between various taxa within this clade need to be resolved more adequately and substantially using genetic, karyological, and morphological data. Two subspecies currently recognized.	R. l. luctus Temminck, 1834 — Sumatra , Java , and Bali I. R. l. foetidus K.Andersen, 1918 - Borneo.	Head-body 89 mm , tail 38—52 mm , ear 28- 5—35 mm , hindfoot 19- 5 mm , forearm 63-4—68-5 71 - 4 mm ; weight 27-37 g . Pelage is long and woolly ; dorsal pelage is dark grayish brown to black with a frosted appearance due to the pale hair tips, while ventral pelage is similar but a more pronounced gray. Ears are moderately long and dull black to dark gray-brown. Noseleaf is dull black to dark gray-brown and has a well-developed and subacutely pointed lancet with a rounded tip; connecting process is broadly rounded and heavily reduced; sella is parallel-sided, and deflected downward and forwards at the tip, with large circular lappets at the base; intemarial cup has upturned edges; horseshoe is wide (12-2—18- 5 mm ) and projects in front and on either side beyond the upper lip, and has a distinct and very deep median emargination that separates the horseshoe in two sides. Lower lip has one mental groove. Skull is very large and robust (zygomatic width is much larger than mastoid width); anterior median swellings are low or moderately developed and antero-posteriorly elongated, not reaching anteriorly to the upper border of the nasal orifice; posterior swellings are reduced and shifted laterally; frontal depression is very deep and elongated; sagittal crest is exceptionally high and suddenly elevated after the junction of the prominent and blade-like supraorbital crests. C1 is very strong, massive, and short; P2 is large to medium-sized and within the tooth row or slightly extruded from it ; P3 is very variable in size and placement, and P2 and P4 can range from separated to touching, based on its position.	Recorded in tropical forest from lowlands up to 1600 m .	No information.	No information.	The Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat roosts in rocky outcrops, rock crevices, niches in cliffs, shallow holes in earth banks, tree roots, and hollow trees. Its flight is low,just above the ground.	The Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat roosts solitarily or in pairs, rarely in small groups.	Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN ed List. The taxonomy and distribution of the Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat are highly uncertain at present, and much further study is needed before a proper assessment of status and threats can be made.	Huang, J. C . C . et al. (2014) | Khan et al. (2007) | Miller (1942) | Volleth , Loidl et al. (2015) | Volleth , Nguyen Truong Son et al. (2017) | Walston et al. (2008b)	https://zenodo.org/record/3750116/files/figure.png	102 . Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus luctus French: Rhinolophe deuil /German: Grosse Wollhaar-Hufeisennase/ Spanish: Herradura lanoso grande Other common names: Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat, Woolly Horseshoe Bat Taxonomy. Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1834 , Tapos , Java , Indonesia . Rhinolophus luctus is included in the trifoliatus species group. Taxonomic status of true R. luctus is currently uncertain. Based primarily on karyological and limited morphological data, three taxa previously included under R. luctus are now recognized as separate species: R.perniger , R. mono , and the recently described R. luctoides , all considered closely related species of the species complex. The exact distributional limits between these species are uncertain. Tentatively , R. luctus in a strict sense is restricted to the Sunda Islands, R. morio consists of lowland populations on the Malay Peninsula, R. luctoides consists of montane populations on the Malay Peninsula and possibly perhaps further north into the rest of South-east Asia, and R.perniger consists of the rest of the former distribution of this species from northern India to continental South-east Asia. Genetic data thus far has not been implemented across the distribution full of this species complex. However, specimens from China and Myanmar clustered with those of R. luctoides , whereas R. morio appeared as sister to this clade based on limited genetic data. A later study by M. Volleth and colleagues in 2017 involving further karyotypic data showed that specimens from China that morphologically resembled specimens from India had a distinct karyotype from R. luctoides and were recognized as a distinct species named herewith R.perniger . On the other hand, a specimen from Vietnam had a karyotype nearly identical to that of R luctoides and this specimen was dubbed R. cf. luctoides . The Vietnamese populations are tentatively included under R. pemiger here, but they may in fact be best included with R. luctoides with further study. Volleth and colleagues in 2015 discussed the possibility that there are multiple cryptic species within the R. luctus species complex living sympatrically throughout the distribution of the complex since there are a number of records through its distribution that do not match the typical description of R. luctus . This may be the case, but a very substantial review of the current material is needed before any more conclusions can be made. Relationships between various taxa within this clade need to be resolved more adequately and substantially using genetic, karyological, and morphological data. Two subspecies currently recognized. Subspecies and Distribution. R. l. luctus Temminck, 1834 — Sumatra , Java , and Bali I. R. l. foetidus K.Andersen, 1918 - Borneo. Descriptive notes. Head-body 89 mm , tail 38—52 mm , ear 28- 5—35 mm , hindfoot 19- 5 mm , forearm 63-4—68-5 71 - 4 mm ; weight 27-37 g . Pelage is long and woolly ; dorsal pelage is dark grayish brown to black with a frosted appearance due to the pale hair tips, while ventral pelage is similar but a more pronounced gray. Ears are moderately long and dull black to dark gray-brown. Noseleaf is dull black to dark gray-brown and has a well-developed and subacutely pointed lancet with a rounded tip; connecting process is broadly rounded and heavily reduced; sella is parallel-sided, and deflected downward and forwards at the tip, with large circular lappets at the base; intemarial cup has upturned edges; horseshoe is wide (12-2—18- 5 mm ) and projects in front and on either side beyond the upper lip, and has a distinct and very deep median emargination that separates the horseshoe in two sides. Lower lip has one mental groove. Skull is very large and robust (zygomatic width is much larger than mastoid width); anterior median swellings are low or moderately developed and antero-posteriorly elongated, not reaching anteriorly to the upper border of the nasal orifice; posterior swellings are reduced and shifted laterally; frontal depression is very deep and elongated; sagittal crest is exceptionally high and suddenly elevated after the junction of the prominent and blade-like supraorbital crests. C1 is very strong, massive, and short; P2 is large to medium-sized and within the tooth row or slightly extruded from it ; P3 is very variable in size and placement, and P2 and P4 can range from separated to touching, based on its position. Habitat. Recorded in tropical forest from lowlands up to 1600 m . Food and Feeding. No information. Breeding. No information. Activity patterns. The Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat roosts in rocky outcrops, rock crevices, niches in cliffs, shallow holes in earth banks, tree roots, and hollow trees. Its flight is low,just above the ground. Movements, Home range and Social organization. The Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat roosts solitarily or in pairs, rarely in small groups. Status and Conservation. Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN ed List. The taxonomy and distribution of the Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat are highly uncertain at present, and much further study is needed before a proper assessment of status and threats can be made. Bibliography. Huang, J. C . C . eta /. (2014), Khan eta /. (2007), Miller (1942), Volleth , Loidl eta /. (2015), Volleth , Nguyen Truong Son eta/. (2017), Walston eta/. (2008b).	Simmons, N.B. and A.L. Cirranello. 2022B. Bat Species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic database. Accessed on 10/11/2022.	Rhinolophidae	Rhinolophus luctus	Rhinolophus		luctus	Temminck	1834	0	Tijdschrift Natuurl. Gesch. Physiol.	1:23	Greater Woolly Horseshoe Bat	 geminus K. Andersen, 1905; <b> foetidus </b> K. Andersen, 1918; <b> perniger </b> Hodgson, 1843; <b>spurcus</b> Allen, 1928.	Indonesia, Java, Tapos.	India, Nepal, Burma, Sri Lanka, S China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Peninsular Malaysia; Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali (Indonesia).	Not listed.	Least Concern	 trifoliatus species group. Does not include lanosus ; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus ; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). Includes perniger pending additional study (see Volleth et al., 2017, 2021; Burgin, 2019; our account for lanosus ). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).	Mammal Diversity Database. (2023). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.11) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7830771 released 15 April 2023	Rhinolophus luctus	23	Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	PTEROPODIFORMES	NA	NA	RHINOLOPHOIDEA	RHINOLOPHIDAE	NA	NA	Rhinolophus	NA	luctus	Temminck	1834	0						Tapos, Java, Indonesia.			luctus Temminck, 1834|geminus K. Andersen, 1905	previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus	Volleth, M., Loidl, J., Mayer, F., Yong, H. S., Müller, S., & Heller, K. G. (2015). Surprising genetic diversity in Rhinolophus luctus (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) from Peninsular Malaysia: description of a new species based on genetic and morphological characters. Acta Chiropterologica, 17(1), 1-20.|Volleth, M., Son, N. T., Wu, Y., Li, Y., Yu, W., Lin, L. K., ... & Harada, M. (2017). Comparative Chromosomal Studies in Rhinolophus formosae and R. luctus from China and Vietnam: Elevation of R. l. lanosus to Species Rank. Acta Chiropterologica, 19(1), 41-50.|Volleth, M., Khan, F. A., Müller, S., Baker, R. J., Arenas-Viveros, D., Stevens, R. D., ... & Sotero-Caio, C. G. (2021). Cytogenetic investigations in Bornean Rhinolophoidea revealed cryptic diversity in Rhinolophus sedulus entailing classification of Peninsular Malaysia specimens as a new species. Acta Chiropterologica, 23(1), 1-20.	Indonesia	Asia|Oceania	Indomalaya|Australasia/Oceania|Palearctic	LC	0	0	0	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	sciname match	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	IUCN. 2022. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on [28 September, 2022].	19548	Rhinolophus luctus	ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	MAMMALIA	CHIROPTERA	RHINOLOPHIDAE	Rhinolophus	luctus	Temminck, 1834	This species belongs to trifoliatus species group. Simmons (2005) inclusion of Sri Lanka in distribution is possibly based on taxon sobrinus Andersen, 1918, which is presently under Rhinolophus beddomei Andersen, 1905 (Srinivasulu pers. comm.).	20000000	Rhinolophus luctus	Least Concern		2019	2018-08-31 00:00:00 UTC	3.1	English	The species is confirmed as Least Concern because of its wide distribution without information about major threats to its conservation status.	The species is a forest dweller, it roosts solitary or in pairs in small to large caves, tunnels, old mine shafts, rocky outcrops and overhanging ledges and large trees with hollow, or under thick bark. It is present in degraded forests, as well, and is apparently somewhat resistant to human disturbance. Its flight is low just above the ground and feeds on coleopterans, termites and other insects.	In view of the species wide range, it seems probable that there are no overall major threats to the species. In South Asia, the habitat of this species is being deforested for timber, firewood and conversion to agricultural use. It is also threatened by hunting for medicinal purposes (Debojit Pukhan pers. comm. January 2002, Molur et al . 2002).	The species appears to be found at naturally low densities.	Unknown	This species is widespread in South Asia, southern China and South East Asia. In South Asia it is presently known from Bangladesh (Chittagong and Sylhet divisions), India (Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Uttaranchal, Sikkim and West Bengal) and Nepal (Central and Eastern Nepal) in South Asia (Molur et al. 2002). In southeastern China, the species has been recorded from Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Guangdong, Guizhou, Sichuan, Fujian, Guangxi, Anhui, Yunnan and Hainan Island. It has been recorded throughout most of continental Southeast Asia, and ranges into Indonesia (Sumatra, Java and Bali) and the island of Borneo (Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia). It has been recorded from sea level to an elevation of 1,600 m asl.		Terrestrial	There are no direct conservation measures in place. In South Asia, it is recorded from protected areas in India like Satpura National Park in Madhya Pradesh. Taxonomy, distribution, ecology, habitat and population monitoring are recommended for this species (Molur et al. 2002). In Southeast Asia, it has been collected in a number of protected areas. In Vietnam, almost all records of the species came from protected areas and its roosting sites are undisturbed.	Indomalayan		FALSE	FALSE	Global	Simmons, N. B., & Cirranello, A. L. (2023). Batnames.org Species List Version 1.4 (1.4). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8136157 	Rhinolophidae	Rhinolophus		luctus	Temminck	1834	0	Tijdschrift Natuurl. Gesch. Physiol.	1:23	Greater Woolly Horseshoe Bat	 geminus K. Andersen, 1905; <b> foetidus </b> K. Andersen, 1918; <b> perniger </b> Hodgson, 1843; <b>spurcus</b> Allen, 1928.	Indonesia, Java, Tapos.	India, Nepal, Burma, Sri Lanka, S China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Peninsular Malaysia; Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali (Indonesia).	Not listed.	Least Concern	 trifoliatus species group. Does not include lanosus ; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus ; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). Includes perniger pending additional study (see Volleth et al., 2017, 2021; Burgin, 2019; our account for lanosus ). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).	Rhinolophus luctus	1004703	23	Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	PTEROPODIFORMES	NA	NA	RHINOLOPHOIDEA	Rhinolophidae	NA	NA	Rhinolophus	NA	luctus	Temminck	1834	0						Tapos, Java, Indonesia.			luctus Temminck, 1834|geminus K. Andersen, 1905	previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus	Volleth, M., Loidl, J., Mayer, F., Yong, H. S., Müller, S., & Heller, K. G. (2015). Surprising genetic diversity in Rhinolophus luctus (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) from Peninsular Malaysia: description of a new species based on genetic and morphological characters. Acta Chiropterologica, 17(1), 1-20.|Volleth, M., Son, N. T., Wu, Y., Li, Y., Yu, W., Lin, L. K., ... & Harada, M. (2017). Comparative Chromosomal Studies in Rhinolophus formosae and R. luctus from China and Vietnam: Elevation of R. l. lanosus to Species Rank. Acta Chiropterologica, 19(1), 41-50.|Volleth, M., Khan, F. A., Müller, S., Baker, R. J., Arenas-Viveros, D., Stevens, R. D., ... & Sotero-Caio, C. G. (2021). Cytogenetic investigations in Bornean Rhinolophoidea revealed cryptic diversity in Rhinolophus sedulus entailing classification of Peninsular Malaysia specimens as a new species. Acta Chiropterologica, 23(1), 1-20.				Indonesia	Asia|Oceania	Indomalaya|Australasia/Oceania|Palearctic	LC	0	0	0	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	sciname match	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	Burgin, C. J., Zijlstra, J. S., Becker, M. A., Handika, H., Alston, J. M., Widness, J., Liphardt, S., Huckaby, D. G., and Upham, N. S. (2025). How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge. Journal of Mammalogy in revision: TBD. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.27.640393	Rhinolophus_luctus	1004703	23	Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	Chiroptera	Yinpterochiroptera	NA	NA	Rhinolophoidea	Rhinolophidae	NA	NA	Rhinolophus	NA	luctus	Temminck	0	Rhinolophus luctus	Temminck, C.J. 1834. Over een geslacht der vleugelhandige zoogdieren, _Bladneus_ genaamd. (_Rhinolophus_ Geoff., Cuv., Illig, Desm.; _Vespertilio_ Linn., Erxleb.; _Noctilio_ Kuhl). Tijdschrift voor Natuurlijke Geschiedenis en Physiologie 1:1-30.	https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13473237	RMNH.MAM.35175	holotype	https://data.biodiversitydata.nl/naturalis/specimen/RMNH.MAM.35175.a | https://data.biodiversitydata.nl/naturalis/specimen/RMNH.MAM.35175.b	Tapos, Java, Indonesia.			previously included R. perniger (formerly known as R. lanosus), R. morio, populations now attributed to R. luctoides, and R. foetidus	Volleth, M., Loidl, J., Mayer, F., Yong, H. S., Müller, S., & Heller, K. G. (2015). Surprising genetic diversity in Rhinolophus luctus (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) from Peninsular Malaysia: description of a new species based on genetic and morphological characters. Acta Chiropterologica, 17(1), 1-20.|Volleth, M., Son, N. T., Wu, Y., Li, Y., Yu, W., Lin, L. K., ... & Harada, M. (2017). Comparative Chromosomal Studies in Rhinolophus formosae and R. luctus from China and Vietnam: Elevation of R. l. lanosus to Species Rank. Acta Chiropterologica, 19(1), 41-50.|Volleth, M., Khan, F. A., Müller, S., Baker, R. J., Arenas-Viveros, D., Stevens, R. D., ... & Sotero-Caio, C. G. (2021). Cytogenetic investigations in Bornean Rhinolophoidea revealed cryptic diversity in Rhinolophus sedulus entailing classification of Peninsular Malaysia specimens as a new species. Acta Chiropterologica, 23(1), 1-20.				Indonesia	Asia|Oceania (Continent)	Indomalaya|Australasia|Palearctic	LC	0	0	0	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	sciname match	Rhinolophus_luctus	0	Simmons, N. B., & Cirranello, A. L. (2025). Batnames.org Species List Version 1.7 (1.7). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14796586	Rhinolophidae	Rhinolophus		luctus	Temminck	1834	0	Tijdschrift Natuurl. Gesch. Physiol.	1:23	Greater Woolly Horseshoe Bat	geminus K. Andersen, 1905; foetidus K. Andersen, 1918; perniger Hodgson, 1843; spurcus Allen, 1928.	Indonesia, Java, Tapos.	India, Nepal, Burma, Sri Lanka, S China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Peninsular Malaysia; Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali (Indonesia).	<a href='https://cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php' target='_blank'>Not Listed</a>	<a href='https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/19548/21977086/' target='_blank'>Least Concern</a>	trifoliatus species group. Does not include perniger or lanosus; see Volleth et al. (2017, 2021) and Burgin (2019), but see also Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951). Does not include foetidus; see Volleth et al. (2021). Does not include beddomei; see Topál and Csorba (1992) and Bates and Harrison (1997). Does not include formosae; see Yoshiyuki and Harada (1995) and Csorba et al. (2003). May include cryptic diversity; see Chornelia et al. (2022).		Mammal Diversity Database. (2025). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 2.2) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15007505	NA	Rhinolophus luctus; Rhinolophus luctus; Rhinolophus luctus; Rhinolophus luctus; Rhinolophus luctus; Rhinolophus lepidus; luctus; foetidus; lanosus; morio; perniger; spurcus; geminus; luctus; foetidus; foetidus; perniger; spurcus; geminus; luctus; geminus; Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Rhinolophe deuil; Grosse Wollhaar-Hufeisennase; Herradura lanosogrande; Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Great Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Typical Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Woolly Horseshoe Bat; Blyth's Horseshoe Bat; R. luctus